Like others mentioned, GOCE and GRACE use pretty different technology (and are all, at this point, experiments). Also, give Germany some credit - GRACE is a joint US-German experiment. International partnerships are a pretty good way for the US to stretch its earth-observation dollar. See: http://science.nasa.gov/missions/grace/
I don't know much about the GOCE experiment, but GRACE's gravity information has been able to show things like ice cap thinning in Greenland, and the density attributable to large (water) aquifers elsewhere.
I think the answer to this is a qualified "yes." Climate data analysis is tough - it takes a long time to collect, coordinate, validate, calibrate - and ulimately analyze - climate data. And that's just to tell WHAT is happening, WHY is even harder.
One of the things that the National Academies and the Government Accountability Office have found is that there isn't a "home" for climate, so efforts take place in a million different uncoordinated (Read: disorganized) places. If nothing else, the House hearing highlighted that fact. NOAA may not be the best place for a National Climate Office/Service, but they do already have the National Climate Data Center - and at least have the infastruture and operational (not R&D) enviornment to continue the studies. I'm glad a national effort is being discussed - if nothing else it would be good (and hopefully save us all some money) to group some of the climate-studying stovepipes together.
The source or sources (not just the content) is often what makes classified things classified. I can easily see a situation where someone would want a classified source OR analysis to confirm open source research. And yes, the level of the analyst where something gets created -will- have an impact on its classification.
The US Office of the Comptroller of Currency (OCC) requires banks, S&Ls and others to have a "customer identification program" to be compliant with the Bank Secrecy Act and the Patriot Act. In short, banks have to have reasonable assurance that you are who you say you are before they're allowed to open an account for you - that precludes what you're talking about.
If you're really nerdy, more information is available at (http://www.occ.treas.gov/BSA/BSAGuidance.htm)
"The couple's child is believed to have a terminal illness. Its only chance of survival is to receive a transfusion of umbilical cord blood from a perfectly matched sibling."
Unfortunately, foresight isn't 20/20. One can't be 100% certain that a disease is terminal until it is, in fact, terminal.
So when are you starting your own grass-roots lobbying organization? Or when are you running for Congress or a legislature ? Like it or not, laws are created in response to requests, these typically come from interest groups and lobbyists. If counter-requests and information aren't available to legislators in a format they can understand, they aren't going to know that there is another set of needs out there.
Furthermore, not all laws "create crimes." Some laws are there to protect my (and your) rights - like those that prevent the government from prosecuting me just because I think the DMCA is bad legislation.
Although you may not realize it, you've hit on the exact point of the program (at least from my perspective as a participant). Learning how to secure a firewall will not help the INS - or anyone else - from doing anything silly. Hopefully, the students trained and funded by this program will be able to help create intelligent information policy - including, but not limited to, the actual work of securing computers.
Slashdot Mirror
Plus, the National Research Council has a long and detailed report on Severe Space Weather Events. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12507.html
Might be a good time for most of the drivers around here to learn how to read maps
Like others mentioned, GOCE and GRACE use pretty different technology (and are all, at this point, experiments). Also, give Germany some credit - GRACE is a joint US-German experiment. International partnerships are a pretty good way for the US to stretch its earth-observation dollar. See: http://science.nasa.gov/missions/grace/ I don't know much about the GOCE experiment, but GRACE's gravity information has been able to show things like ice cap thinning in Greenland, and the density attributable to large (water) aquifers elsewhere.
I think the answer to this is a qualified "yes." Climate data analysis is tough - it takes a long time to collect, coordinate, validate, calibrate - and ulimately analyze - climate data. And that's just to tell WHAT is happening, WHY is even harder. One of the things that the National Academies and the Government Accountability Office have found is that there isn't a "home" for climate, so efforts take place in a million different uncoordinated (Read: disorganized) places. If nothing else, the House hearing highlighted that fact. NOAA may not be the best place for a National Climate Office/Service, but they do already have the National Climate Data Center - and at least have the infastruture and operational (not R&D) enviornment to continue the studies. I'm glad a national effort is being discussed - if nothing else it would be good (and hopefully save us all some money) to group some of the climate-studying stovepipes together.
The source or sources (not just the content) is often what makes classified things classified. I can easily see a situation where someone would want a classified source OR analysis to confirm open source research. And yes, the level of the analyst where something gets created -will- have an impact on its classification.
The US Office of the Comptroller of Currency (OCC) requires banks, S&Ls and others to have a "customer identification program" to be compliant with the Bank Secrecy Act and the Patriot Act. In short, banks have to have reasonable assurance that you are who you say you are before they're allowed to open an account for you - that precludes what you're talking about.
If you're really nerdy, more information is available at (http://www.occ.treas.gov/BSA/BSAGuidance.htm)
"The couple's child is believed to have a terminal illness. Its only chance of survival is to receive a transfusion of umbilical cord blood from a perfectly matched sibling."
Unfortunately, foresight isn't 20/20. One can't be 100% certain that a disease is terminal until it is, in fact, terminal.
Furthermore, not all laws "create crimes." Some laws are there to protect my (and your) rights - like those that prevent the government from prosecuting me just because I think the DMCA is bad legislation.
Although you may not realize it, you've hit on the exact point of the program (at least from my perspective as a participant). Learning how to secure a firewall will not help the INS - or anyone else - from doing anything silly. Hopefully, the students trained and funded by this program will be able to help create intelligent information policy - including, but not limited to, the actual work of securing computers.